ICC News: Restructuring the ICC, BCCI Influence & more

[sifter132]

I don't really see the gain for BCCI here, this committee is mostly about rules right? And they already got the DRS revoked for their matches...what else does BCCI want to change? Or do they just want fingers in EVERY pie.

I'm not willing to point too many fingers without knowing the full story. But if it's true that the captains were being influenced by boards and politics, then I think that is not good at all - whoever they voted for. Perhaps in the past, May got in based on those same board meddlings.

 

[used2bcool]

I don't really see the gain for BCCI here, this committee is mostly about rules right? And they already got the DRS revoked for their matches...what else does BCCI want to change? Or do they just want fingers in EVERY pie.

I'm not willing to point too many fingers without knowing the full story. But if it's true that the captains were being influenced by boards and politics, then I think that is not good at all - whoever they voted for. Perhaps in the past, May got in based on those same board meddlings.

It seems unlikely to me that this is anything more than a "screw you" to FICA, which is an organization that the BCCI does not recognize. The BCCI more or less owns the two committees above this one, so having ANOTHER rep (remember Ravi Shastri is already there) on this particular committee doesn't seem to achieve anything new.

On the other hand, I think it's naive to expect the captains to vote of their own accord. Those were always going to be votes influences by the boards. I don't get all the outrage, to be honest. Are we all drinking the ICC "no interference" koolaid here? No way.

 

[War]

If we examine how the member board approach the BCCI this is how it is right now:

- England is the only board that really stands up toe BCCI. This is seen with regards to how ECB contracts are set which basically prevents their best players from playing in the IPL. And also the fact the ECB/MCC as the founders of cricket are concerned/appalled/jealous of how the BCCI has capitalized finacially on its T20 creation & is now destroying cricket with it.

- Australia & S Africa are in bed with India and its just taking their finances. See Sydney gate 2008 controversy, the amount of AUS players in the IPL and the Champions League creation that is run by all 3 boards & S Africa hosting the C-League & IPL 09.

- The Asian block of course supports India to death. Bangladesh probably the dumbest of the lot since they take whatever money/influence BCCI gives them - while ignoring the fact that India has never toured Bangladesh for a full test series.

- West Indies as a weak financial board take whatever they can from India. Most notably in the amount of money they get from the amount of windies players in the IPL.

- Zimbabwe are strange, but when push comes to shove they would side against the so called "white countries". See their voting in the John Howard race to become ICC president.

- NZ are a similar weak board financially to the windies. They will obviously side with AUS/ENG/SA in certain major issues - see DRS. But if push comes to shove especially with their big players playing in the IPL too - they are vulnerable to BCCI money influence

As Toney Greig said before he died in the last MCC spirit of cricket lecture - MCC Spirit of Cricket Lecture : Tony Greig Cowdrey Lecture: The full transcript | Cricket News | Marylebone Cricket Club | ESPN Cricinfo - Greig implores India to govern for the world game

"We can huff and puff as much as we like and have all sorts of external reports," Greig continued, "but this situation can only be resolved by India accepting that the spirit of cricket is more important than generating billions of dollars; it's more important than turning out multi-millionaire players; and it's more important than getting square with Australia and England for their bully-boy tactics towards India over the years. It's ironic that the world, including India, rightly worships at the Nelson Mandela altar because of his conciliatory attitude but then India eschews his approach by indulging in a little pay back."

India's behavior has its roots in racial lines. Its time to say it raw & stop beating around the bush. Now that they have the money its all about "pay back" to ENG, AUS for when they had the veto influence in world cricket.

India's distgusting power in game is epitomized in one man - Narayanaswami Srinivasan. Owner of India cement, Owner of Chennai super kings, BCCI President and a ICC director. This takes the idea of conflict of interest to another level.

 

[used2bcool]

^ So I came back to post on Planetcricket after a couple of years. Good to see the trolls are still here.

The more things change, the more same they remain.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

- Zimbabwe are strange, but when push comes to shove they would side against the so called "white countries". See their voting in the John Howard race to become ICC president.

pretty sure india backed zimbabwe's proposals to become a test nation and have supported them numerous times when they've come under fire. it's not a case of being against white nations.

 

[Satan666]

pretty sure india backed zimbabwe's proposals to become a test nation and have supported them numerous times when they've come under fire. it's not a case of being against white nations.

Can we really classify Zimbabwe as a white nation? Checks show that the white poulation accounts for less than 2% population. Of recent times the blacks have also taken up leading positions in the administration of the country and by extension cricket. So war's argument still holds, using Zimbabwe to support your view has zero merit!

 

[War]

pretty sure india backed zimbabwe's proposals to become a test nation and have supported them numerous times when they've come under fire. it's not a case of being against white nations.

ZIM really should not have gotten test status back really. So if its is India supported them regaining test status (not sure), it could be a reward for supporting BCCI & the asian block for that controversial non backing of John Howard for ICC president a few years back.

Plus we all know the condemnations certain big countries & former ZIM players (flower brothers, goodwin etc) condemned the ZIM board which lead to them losing test status anyway.

That's why i say they are strange because realistically they are an irrelevant board that probably have as much influence as the associate nations & could be swayed either side depending on what suites their interests. But this should not be the case for obvious reasons.

----------

The question must be asked IMO is what did England/Australia do when they had veto power of world cricket ever do to harm the upcoming nations before India power in world cricket came about in the mid/late 90s when Jagmohan Dalmiya became president?

I have heard Indian's complain that for example the "Indian players were not in world series cricket" as one of their gripes. But if we look back at test history did any Indian players ever look like ODI quality based on performances especially after the 1975 world cup to get Packer attention?. Sunil Gavaskar as most know scored 36 not out in a 60 over match during that tournament.

Top Pakistan players like Imran, Javed, Asif Iqbal, Majid Khan (i think) were in World series. Plus of course Packer himself marketed the WSC around the west indians.

Plus on other issues i don't know of now instance when the MCC ever tried to "bully" world cricket due to its influence like the BCCI does. Based on what i've read the MCC although they were a boys club & quite posh & oligarchic in its outlook , after world war 2 slowly but surely got more contries involved in the sport.

Only thing i can seriously criticizing them for doing is not making the MCC/ICC power more global after the packer affair, similar to how FIFA became became a strong governing body under Joe Havelange after years of English control over that federation too.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

ZIM really should not have gotten test status back really. So if its is India supported them regaining test status (not sure), it could be a reward for supporting BCCI & the asian block for that controversial non backing of John Howard for ICC president a few years back.

Plus we all know the condemnations certain big countries & former ZIM players (flower brothers, goodwin etc) condemned the ZIM board which lead to them losing test status anyway.

That's why i say they are strange because realistically they are an irrelevant board that probably have as much influence as the associate nations & could be swayed either side depending on what suites their interests. But this should not be the case for obvious reasons.

no, I mean way back. it's not a new thing zimbabwe supporting india, it's been going on for years.

though I don't see why they are irrelevant if they are a full test nation. how would you like to see power distributed? by whoever makes the most money?

The question must be asked IMO is what did England/Australia do when they had veto power of world cricket ever do to harm the upcoming nations before India power in world cricket came about in the mid/late 90s when Jagmohan Dalmiya became president?

I have heard Indian's complain that for example the "Indian players were not in world series cricket" as one of their gripes. But if we look back at test history did any Indian players ever look like ODI quality based on performances especially after the 1975 world cup to get Packer attention?. Sunil Gavaskar as most know scored 36 not out in a 60 over match during that tournament.

Top Pakistan players like Imran, Javed, Asif Iqbal, Majid Khan (i think) were in World series. Plus of course Packer himself marketed the WSC around the west indians.

Plus on other issues i don't know of now instance when the MCC ever tried to "bully" world cricket due to its influence like the BCCI does. Based on what i've read the MCC although they were a boys club & quite posh & oligarchic in its outlook , after world war 2 slowly but surely got more contries involved in the sport.

Only thing i can seriously criticizing them for doing is not making the MCC/ICC power more global after the packer affair, similar to how FIFA became became a strong governing body under Joe Havelange after years of English control over that federation too.

well that's sort of exactly the problem. england were quite happy to run the world of cricket out there back yard when they could. which is how this situation was able to happen.

but there are some examples, like the 7 years the ICC fought to retain apartheid africa after olympic council banned them and I don't imagine the first three world cups being held in england sat well with anyone at the time. also rebel tours were dealt with differently, west indies players got a life ban for a rebel tour, english players got a 3 year one.

england and australia are percieved to have held back nations while india supported them. it was india that fought for sri lanka's inclusion and bangladesh's, this is still happening as pawar was the guy that removed the limit on associate nations.

 

[Satan666]

^^Why do you continually support this evil that is the BCCI? Are you that blind to see how theyre destroying cricket, for selfish monetary gains!

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

no. silly knee jerk reactionary opinion just bugs me in general.

if I was on a site continually praising the BCCI then I'd probably be critisizing them at every opportunity. the BCCI clearly does many things that do harm cricket, but not nearly as much as some of the people on this site would have you believe.

one example was the rubbish people would post about india selecting their team based on the IPL or limited over performances when nearly every player they'd selected for the test team had come through on the back ranji performances or had been in the team years before t20 existed. but it fitted a narrative people wanted to buy into, that the IPL was linked to india getting hammered by england and australia, so people just kept repeating it despite it being utter rot.

furthermore, pretending that any other nation wouldn't be as equally self-centered is just fantasy, so the hypocrisy bothers me.

 

[Satan666]

no. silly knee jerk reactionary opinion just bugs me in general.

if I was on a site continually praising the BCCI then I'd probably be critisizing them at every opportunity. the BCCI clearly does many things that do harm cricket, but not nearly as much as some of the people on this site would have you believe.

one example was the rubbish people would post about india selecting their team based on the IPL or limited over performances when nearly every player they'd selected for the test team had come through on the back ranji performances or had been in the team years before t20 existed. but it fitted a narrative people wanted to buy into, that the IPL was linked to india getting hammered by england and australia, so people just kept repeating it despite it being utter rot.

furthermore, pretending that any other nation wouldn't be as equally self-centered is just fantasy, so the hypocrisy bothers me.

I really couldnt care what bothers you or itches your behind when you sleep at nights but at the end of it all these guys are out for money, not through the correct means but by the blood, sweat and tears being shed out by the millions of poor Indians who cram the grounds to see mortals play a game called cricket, no not cricket T20 slog. So theyre using their own kind.

Saying that any other nation would react like the Indians show how clouded your judgement is in general, when the English and Aussies were the major blocks in administration the WI were the best team, SL and Zim were granted test status and both these teams blossomed in the 90's, SL winnning the world cup in '96. Yes the finances were managed properly, each board had a fair share of the pie their voices were heard and there was unity amongst the nations.

Now with the BCCI in charge the ICC appears to be as corrupted as FIFA, the Indians run things and any one or nation standing up to them are dealt with accordingly.

These people must mend their ways soon, as the Indians say Karma catches up with us all.

----------

Another example of evil doing:

ICC news : ICC denies voting impropriety | Cricket News | Cricinfo ICC Site | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

IPL tickets aren't really horrendous, and charging people admittance to a ground see a sport is generally quite normal. I am not sure how this constitutes people shedding "blood" for money. and if I recall correctly wasn't it the ICC and west indian board that charged people through the nose for the 2007 world cup to condemnation of everyone?

all teams had a fair share of the cash and there was unity? yes, that will be why we had the packer break away cricket series and players being banned for going on rebel tours, players literally quitting the ICC regulated form of the game. sounds like a real love in.

I mean, obviously hating india is your thing and you;re just trolling again but hells bells, at least try and make sense.

 

[Satan666]

^^Its not a matter of me hating India, its a matter of bringing out their wrongdoings. With the Packer series and controversial ticket sales in the WI aside it still doesn't make what the BCCI are doing correct, they're a corrupt board that is now calling all the shots at the ICC. At the end of the day they're evil and guilty of wrongdoing, surely we can agree on this!

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

well, it is a bit of a matter of you hating india because you've been trolling these forums for over a year. do I agree with you? no of course I don't, most of the posts you make are racist or stupid and only to annoy indian posters because you're in love with brian lara. none of your opinions are of any real interest to me, however I am glad you asked that question because it was nice to have the chance to explain why I sometimes seem to be supporting the BCCI in the face of their corruption.

 

[1iram1]

brian lara

Afridi is his favourite batsman. That should tell you a lot